Location of Repository

Best interests, dementia and the Mental Capacity Act (2005)\ud

By R. A. Hope, Anne Slowther and J. Eccles


The Mental Capacity Act (2005) is an impressive piece of\ud legislation that deserves serious ethical attention, but\ud much of the commentary on the Act has focussed on its\ud legal and practical implications rather than the underlying\ud ethical concepts. This paper examines the approach that\ud the Act takes to best interests. The Act does not provide\ud an account of the underlying concept of best interests.\ud Instead it lists factors that must be considered in\ud determining best interests, and the Code of Practice to\ud the Act states that this list is incomplete. This paper\ud argues that this general approach is correct, contrary to\ud some accounts of best interests. The checklist includes\ud items that are unhelpful. Furthermore, neither the Act nor\ud its Code of Practice provides sufficient guidance to carers\ud faced with difficult decisions concerning best interests.\ud This paper suggests ways in which the checklist can be\ud developed and discusses cases that could be used in an\ud updated Code of Practice

Topics: RC
Publisher: BMJ Group
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:3136

Suggested articles



  1. Advance directives and dementia. doi
  2. (2001). Advance directives in dementia care: from instructions to instruments. Patient Educ Counsel doi
  3. Advance directives in psychiatric care: a narrative approach. doi
  4. (1999). Advance directives: limitations upon their applicability in elderly care. doi
  5. (1986). Autonomy and the demented self. The Millbank Quarterly doi
  6. Autonomy, authenticity, or best interests: everyday decision-making and persons with dementia.
  7. (2007). Constitutional Affairs. Mental Capacity Act 2005: Code of practice. London: The Stationery Office,
  8. (1989). Deciding for others: the ethics of surrogate decision making. Cambridge: doi
  9. Determining the validity of advance directives.
  10. (1995). Dworkin on dementia: elegant theory, questionable policy. Hastings Center Rep doi
  11. (2004). Enough: the failure of the living will. Hastings Center Rep doi
  12. (1997). Ethical hazards of substituted judgment test in decision making concerning the end of life of dementia patients. doi
  13. (1993). Life’s dominion: an argument about abortion and euthanasia. doi
  14. Margo’s logo. doi
  15. (1972). Notes from underground. Translated by J Coulson.
  16. (2005). Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI). Mental Capacity Act
  17. (1999). Respecting the margins of agency: Alzheimer’s patients and the capacity to value. Philos Public Aff doi
  18. (1999). Some reflections on the problem of advance directives, personhood, and personal identity. doi
  19. The best interests standard for incompetent or incapacitated persons of all ages. doi
  20. (1994). The incompetent patient on the slippery slope. Hastings Center Rep doi
  21. (1998). The time frame of preferences, dispositions, and the validity of advance directives for the mentally ill. Philos, Psychiatry,
  22. (1998). Toward a pure best interests model of proxy decision making for incompetent psychiatric patients. doi
  23. (1995). Value theory and the best interests standard. doi
  24. Views of the person with dementia. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.